[RyanGibbard]

Last question wasn't the best 18 marks I've ever written... but the rest of the paper was very nice indeed.

[Priti94]

How did you guys draw the burger king diagram?

[_Saaaam_]

Paper was pretty good, but can anyone tell me if you can reach level 3/4 in the last question if you dont state the pros for regulation?
i talked about what the regulation will do and said the cons, and did alternatives etc in level 4 and conclusion but not the pros..

cheers guys

[_Saaaam_]

(Original post by Priti94)
How did you guys draw the burger king diagram?

opposite to the mcdonalds one, thats all i can remember from it!
i think ...

[Clare1994]

(Original post by _Saaaam_)
Paper was pretty good, but can anyone tell me if you can reach level 3/4 in the last question if you dont state the pros for regulation?
i talked about what the regulation will do and said the cons, and did alternatives etc in level 4 and conclusion but not the pros..

cheers guys

The pros tend to be what you say about the theory of how it works cause you're saying how it should reduce the market failure.

[Jamito]

Amazing paper.. Easy 6 marks for the opening question, some very basic diagram questions and a brilliant 18 marker. The only one I was a little sceptical about was the YED question.. I got 0 for the USA and 2 for Japan.. Apart from that thought it was awesome!

[Clare1994]

Did anyone else say that you could use regulation in more than one way?
I said you could ban it completely or just ban fast food with over a certain % of fat in it.
And *******s i just realised i don't think i mentioned penalties at all I said the law would have to be inforced but not how.

[_Saaaam_]

(Original post by Clare1994)
The pros tend to be what you say about the theory of how it works cause you're saying how it should reduce the market failure.

ah i see, think i did them then..
if i didnt does that restrict my chances of gaining level 3/4?

[Clare1994]

(Original post by _Saaaam_)
ah i see, think i did them then..
if i didnt does that restrict my chances of gaining level 3/4?

Possibly but as long as the theory is good i reckon you're fine.
I didn't like the wording of the question I was like do i compare it to other methods or... At the end i came to the conclusion it's not best on it's own

[_Saaaam_]

(Original post by Clare1994)
Possibly but as long as the theory is good i reckon you're fine.
I didn't like the wording of the question I was like do i compare it to other methods or... At the end i came to the conclusion it's not best on it's own

god, its one of those questions i either aced, or completely flopped

we'll see!
yes i agree, i started off thinking not to compare it to other methods but pleased i did in the end
haha yeh, just squeezed that in at the end - hope the examiner can read it because i was running out of time!

[Clare1994]

(Original post by _Saaaam_)
god, its one of those questions i either aced, or completely flopped

we'll see!
yes i agree, i started off thinking not to compare it to other methods but pleased i did in the end
haha yeh, just squeezed that in at the end - hope the examiner can read it because i was running out of time!

I just put in a little about tax haha

[_Saaaam_]

(Original post by Clare1994)
I just put in a little about tax haha

was that your alternatives?

[JOR2010]

(Original post by Clare1994)
Did anyone else say that you could use regulation in more than one way?
I said you could ban it completely or just ban fast food with over a certain % of fat in it.
And *******s i just realised i don't think i mentioned penalties at all I said the law would have to be inforced but not how.

Yeah, I talked about regulation in many ways. The case study talked of regulation in regards to forcing information provision on fast food. I also talked about a limit on selling fast food. As long as you've said how regulation can be successful and unsuccessful in at least ONE way, that's fine.

[zachyg]

Really disliked how the last question was worded. Because of the wording I purposely didn't mention any alternatives

[Stardust Mirage]

For the 18 marker I talked about the negative externality and how regulation used tax to decrease consumption. I also wrote about information failure and that regulation made them to provide accurate information. Have I messed up on it? I thought I talked too much about tax -_-

[Clare1994]

(Original post by JOR2010)
Yeah, I talked about regulation in many ways. The case study talked of regulation in regards to forcing information provision on fast food. I also talked about a limit on selling fast food. As long as you've said how regulation can be successful and unsuccessful in at least ONE way, that's fine.

dam this is why i should read the article haha oh well idk

[nm786]

i didn't talk about information failure

[Clare1994]

(Original post by Stardust Mirage)
For the 18 marker I talked about the negative externality and how regulation used tax to decrease consumption. I also wrote about information failure and that regulation made them to provide accurate information. Have I messed up on it? I thought I talked too much about tax -_-

Possibly i personally didn't do much theory on tax i basically said it could be used and to get rid of the externality it would have to be set where social costs meet private benefit

[Clare1994]

(Original post by nm786)
i didn't talk about information failure

Me neither nor information provision.

[nm786]

i liked the january paper,
it's a shame i didn't do well in it,
looking back at it now, it was bloody easy.